IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT APPEAL NO.6534 OF 2017 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
1. THE COMMISSIONER, COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THANTRIKA BHAVANA, PALACE ROAD,BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SHIMOGGA – 577 202. … APPELLANTS (BY SRI LAKSHMINARAYANA, AGA) AND:
1. SMT. GURUSHANTHAMMA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS WIFE OF LATE THIPPESWAMY RESIDING AT NO.3371 OF 24A, M.C.C., ‘B’ BLOCK, KUVEMPUNAGAR, DAVANAGERE 2. THE PRINCIPAL AVK WOMEN 1ST GRADE COLLEGE DAVANGERE-560 016 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M. RAGHAVENDRA ACHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-1, R-2 IS SERVED AND UN-REPRESENTED) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO.35308 OF 2014(S-RES) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE.
***** THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH.,J DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T Aggrieved by the order dated 14.06.2016 in W.P.No.35308 of 2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in partly allowing the petition, respondents No.1 and 2 therein have filed the instant writ appeal.
2. The plea of the appellants are that the learned Single Judge has committed an error in directing respondent No.1 to consider the representation of the petitioner as the petitioner is not entitled for an appointment on compassionate grounds.
3. The same has been disputed by the respondent’s counsel.
4. On hearing learned counsels, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The veracity of the Government order has since been considered by the judgment of this Court in the case of BHEEMASHANKAR VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS IN WRIT PETITION NO.81882 OF 2009. Following the said order relief was granted and respondent No.3 was directed to forward the representation of the petitioner to respondent No.1 for grant of appointment on compassionate grounds.
Since the order has been passed by placing reliance of the then earlier order passed by this Court, we do not find any grounds to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE HR